The Operations Research / Management Science Blog

An article titled “Model World: The Hidden Ingredient and Nature vs. Nurture” written by Dr. Saul I. Gass at the Decision and Information Technologies Department at University of Maryland was published on the current issue of Interfaces. In the article the author talked about what makes an individual the “OR type” of person by telling the stories of some remarkable individuals and their contributions in the the history of OR. I found the article to be a very interesting and inspiring read, mostly because I had always wondered whether I had an OR person in me before I decided to apply for the graduate programs in this field. I came to the conclusion that I was a good candidate for becoming a good OR person because I got pretty good grades in all my math courses at university and I have always had intense passion for OR. However, after reading this article, I realized that the way I analyzed myself was a bit too superficial. From this article I learned that your OR personality, if you have it, is reflected in almost every aspect of your life, be it your work or how you do your grocery shopping. You need to have the habit of thinking in a systematic fashion and be kind of a perfectionist who always pursues the “optimal” way to achieve something.

I always wondered what made the early OR analysts feel that they were the “OR type” of person who could make a living “doing” OR and, maybe, even make a contribution to the field. Speaking for myself, I found OR interesting; it was fun; there were jobs; and the pay was reasonable. However, the questions remain: What characteristics do OR people exhibit that make them candidates to pursue OR as a profession? Does someone take to OR because of nature (genes and DNA) or nurture (real-world experiences) or some mysterious mix?

The article mentioned Frederick Winslow Taylor (1856–1915) (See picture), who is known as the “father of scientific management”. His book “Shop Management”, published in 1903, was arguably the first scholarly work on management. In the book he argued that management should be studied in a scientific approach. The best ways to assign tasks and compensate employees should be done through the traditional scientific methods including observation and experimentation. In this regard, I guess that Taylor was one of the people who pioneered the idea of using traditional scientific methods to solve untraditional scientific problems, which could be used as another definition of OR. Based on the stories told by the author, it seems that Taylor really had some OR personality traits in his DNA.

Were there any inherent forces that propelled Taylor into scientific management? Kanigel (1997, p. 104) offers a few observations by one of Taylor’s teenage friends: Taylor’s obsession with precision in his marking off a playing field in feet and inches; his hiking excursions in which he tried to “discover the step which would cover the greatest distance with the least expenditure of energy; or the easiest method for vaulting a fence [or] the right length and proportions of a walking stick.”

I would highly recommend anyone to read this article. However, don’t be discouraged if you are not like Taylor. After all, knowledge and real-world experiences are the most important characteristics that define a good OR professional.

References
“Model World: The Hidden Ingredient and Nature vs. Nurture” by Saul I. Gass, Interfaces, Nov-Dec 2007
“Frederick Winslow Taylor: Father of Modern Management“, Management Guru
“Frederick Winslow Taylor“, Wikipedia